AI is Stupid.
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
I've thought about the same thing. If I want to have AI write a subroutine, I have to instruct AI's every step. I could say "Make a web page", but what would be the default output? This is why I think writing code for specific purposes is no different than writing it on your own. Sure, AI can make something generic, but if you want software developed, you still have to designate each instruction on your own.
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
theoldfool wrote:
all my life, it has been said that I am 90% potential.
American? Maybe they wear that smile because they're told to. If you're above 40%, they're either a salesmen, or a politician. If you think 90%, then boy, you're gullible.
theoldfool wrote:
Like everything on the Internet, it is too easy to be anonymous.
Which it also was before the internet. That's just temporary though, as everyone is on Facebook and Twitter.
theoldfool wrote:
Dreams are free. Goals are expensive.
You just used a lot of words, and said nothing. Hello :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
fgs1963 wrote:
The potential of AI is undeniably profound.
Well that does not really mean anything. Yes AI has potential, but it is far too early to say whether that will be good or bad for the world.
Bad. The systems will continue to spew untruths and humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation. Such is my prognostication. ;P
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
-
jschell wrote:
However "AI" as it is currently used is a marketing term.
True, at least 98.796% of the time (IMHO). But... there are some highly funded groups working on the real deal. Combine that with the "potential" of quantum computing and we may be on the cusp of a societal sea change.
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Ahhh ... but do you have to keep explaining the same thing again and again?
-
Bad. The systems will continue to spew untruths and humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation. Such is my prognostication. ;P
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
Mark Starr wrote:
The systems will continue to spew untruths and humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation.
Errr...except the following is true right now 'Humans will continue to spew untruths and other humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation.' So not really that much change.
-
Ahhh ... but do you have to keep explaining the same thing again and again?
-
fgs1963 wrote:
there are some highly funded groups working on the real deal
All of that has been true since the 1960s though.
There are orders of magnitude more software developers today than the 60s. There are orders of magnitude more money being committed to AI development today than the 60s. Average people carry vastly more computer power around in their pockets than existed (globally) in the 60s. Massive troves of digitized data sets exist today that didn't exist in the 60s. There is huge bandwidth available today that lets groups around the globe collaborate in real time that didn't exist in the 60s. Lets not compare software development of the past to software development today... it is farcical.
-
Mark Starr wrote:
The systems will continue to spew untruths and humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation.
Errr...except the following is true right now 'Humans will continue to spew untruths and other humans will continue to be too lazy to fact-check the misinformation.' So not really that much change.
:) :) Ha! True dat. :) :) Touché
Time is the differentiation of eternity devised by man to measure the passage of human events. - Manly P. Hall Mark Just another cog in the wheel
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not)
How is that different than talking to most people online? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Jeremy Falcon
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
There are orders of magnitude more software developers today than the 60s. There are orders of magnitude more money being committed to AI development today than the 60s. Average people carry vastly more computer power around in their pockets than existed (globally) in the 60s. Massive troves of digitized data sets exist today that didn't exist in the 60s. There is huge bandwidth available today that lets groups around the globe collaborate in real time that didn't exist in the 60s. Lets not compare software development of the past to software development today... it is farcical.
"A million monkeys and a million typewriters" ... is what it is.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
No appreciation for sarcasm, innuendo, puns, jokes, plays on words, history. The homogenizing of civilization. Having a conversation where "AI" is the mediator is exhausting. You have to "explain" everything until it "gets" it (or not) in order to comply with (its) "Guidelines".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Does sound all that different than a programming language then, does it? You have to be absolutely precise and correct to have it do exactly what you want it to do. No room for nuances. When I ask ChatGPT a question, I keep that in mind and seldom get completely useless answers.
-
"A million monkeys and a million typewriters" ... is what it is.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
There are orders of magnitude more software developers today than the 60s. There are orders of magnitude more money being committed to AI development today than the 60s. Average people carry vastly more computer power around in their pockets than existed (globally) in the 60s. Massive troves of digitized data sets exist today that didn't exist in the 60s. There is huge bandwidth available today that lets groups around the globe collaborate in real time that didn't exist in the 60s. Lets not compare software development of the past to software development today... it is farcical.
fgs1963 wrote:
There are orders of magnitude more software developers today than the 60s. There are orders of magnitude more money being committed to AI development today than the 60s.
I believe that there is far more money and resources being used to search for Extraterrestrials too.
fgs1963 wrote:
Lets not compare software development of the past to software development today... it is farcical
And yet there is still nothing even close to the actual meaning of Artificial Intelligence. Perhaps far more claims that it is the same though.
-
fgs1963 wrote:
There are orders of magnitude more software developers today than the 60s. There are orders of magnitude more money being committed to AI development today than the 60s.
I believe that there is far more money and resources being used to search for Extraterrestrials too.
fgs1963 wrote:
Lets not compare software development of the past to software development today... it is farcical
And yet there is still nothing even close to the actual meaning of Artificial Intelligence. Perhaps far more claims that it is the same though.
jschell wrote:
And yet there is still nothing even close to the actual meaning of Artificial Intelligence.
How do you possibly know what is or isn't being done in the R&D labs at IBM, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Oracle, etc...? How do you possibly know what is or isn't being done in classified government research labs in the US, UK, China, Russia, etc...?
-
jschell wrote:
And yet there is still nothing even close to the actual meaning of Artificial Intelligence.
How do you possibly know what is or isn't being done in the R&D labs at IBM, Microsoft, Google, Apple, Oracle, etc...? How do you possibly know what is or isn't being done in classified government research labs in the US, UK, China, Russia, etc...?
-
Yeah, you are right: If you really want something to be true, and there is no evidence of it, you can claim that it still is true somewhere behind closed doors. Then it probably is true. At least for you.
Nice strawman but it applies equally well to AI luddites who claim to know the status of 100's of projects that they are not a part of (or even qualified to be a part of). I'm truly shocked by how backward thinking so many "software developers" here at CP are. The incessant whining about the state of AI is sad.
